One DYS490 = 10 SRY2627+ individual has R-L628+ and another DYS490 = 10 individual has R-L659+; L628+ and L659+ are private SNPs. I am SRY2627+ (DYS490 = 10, DYS425 = null, DYS525 = 6) and have not tested any SNPS downstream from SRY2627+.Stephen

I am not sure if this is what you intended, but this information leads me to believe that there is not a universal SNP associated with DYS 490=10.

I recognize that SRY2627+ 4090=10 people are not marked by a unique SNP, at least yet. Hoewever, 4090=10 is such a rare occurrence that I think we could consider this a reliable clade.

Out of about 5000 P312 confirmed people tested for 490, outside of SRY2627, only 3 are 490=10. There aren't that many 490=11's even. 490=12 is modal. I just think the odds are very great that if you are SRY2767+ and 490=10 then you are probably more closely related to all of the other SRY2627+ 490=10 folks than to the SRY2627=12 folks. That makes 490=10 a clade for SRY2627.

Here are the SRY2627 490=10 guys that have Old World MDKA's in our DNA projects. There are a couple from Spain, but there are more from France and Germany.

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

Arch

Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, and there are probably several others.

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

Arch

Even though I sagree that SRY2627 may be about 3,000 ybp, I don't think that is that young in comparison to the great expansion of major R-L11 subclaces.

SRY2627's STR diversity is below Z196's, which is as it should be but it is not that young. Below is the relative variance to P312 all (1.0) for SRY2627. This on 167 67 STR haplotypes so I think the data set is pretty good.SRY2627_____________: Var=0.83 [Mixed 49] (N=167) SRY2627_____________: Var=0.77 [Linear 36] (N=167)

Essentially, the inference is that SRY2627's age is about 80% of P312's. M153's would be more like the range of 40% of P312's.

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

If they are confirmed SRY2627+ and in a public FTDNA project I will add them to the spreadsheet.

One DYS490 = 10 SRY2627+ individual has R-L628+ and another DYS490 = 10 individual has R-L659+; L628+ and L659+ are private SNPs. I am SRY2627+ (DYS490 = 10, DYS425 = null, DYS525 = 6) and have not tested any SNPS downstream from SRY2627+.Stephen

I am not sure if this is what you intended, but this information leads me to believe that there is not a universal SNP associated with DYS 490=10.

I recognize that SRY2627+ 4090=10 people are not marked by a unique SNP, at least yet. Hoewever, 4090=10 is such a rare occurrence that I think we could consider this a reliable clade.

Out of about 5000 P312 confirmed people tested for 490, outside of SRY2627, only 3 are 490=10. There aren't that many 490=11's even. 490=12 is modal. I just think the odds are very great that if you are SRY2767+ and 490=10 then you are probably more closely related to all of the other SRY2627+ 490=10 folks than to the SRY2627=12 folks. That makes 490=10 a clade for SRY2627.....

But does a rare occurrence mean it doesn't mutate quickly? I thought SNPs were based off of mutation rates, and not so much on rarity of STRs; especially one STR. Otherwise, DYS448=17 would signify another subclade within SRY2627 because of its rarity. Or am I just interpreting this wrong?

No. A rare occurrence may or may not be old. In this case there are enough SRY2627+ 490=10 people with enough diversity on other STRs that I would predict that the mutation from 490=12 to 490=10 is quite old.

448=17 may represent another subclade. I don't know.

Ken Nordtvedt has long been a proponent of the idea that a subclade is a group related people, whether they have an SNP that marks them or not.

Are there another STR off-modals that combine with 448=17 for a strong STR signature under SRY2627+ 490=10? The more the merrier in terms of improving the probability there is an underlying subclade.

One DYS490 = 10 SRY2627+ individual has R-L628+ and another DYS490 = 10 individual has R-L659+; L628+ and L659+ are private SNPs. I am SRY2627+ (DYS490 = 10, DYS425 = null, DYS525 = 6) and have not tested any SNPS downstream from SRY2627+.Stephen

I am not sure if this is what you intended, but this information leads me to believe that there is not a universal SNP associated with DYS 490=10.

I recognize that SRY2627+ 4090=10 people are not marked by a unique SNP, at least yet. Hoewever, 4090=10 is such a rare occurrence that I think we could consider this a reliable clade.

Out of about 5000 P312 confirmed people tested for 490, outside of SRY2627, only 3 are 490=10. There aren't that many 490=11's even. 490=12 is modal. I just think the odds are very great that if you are SRY2767+ and 490=10 then you are probably more closely related to all of the other SRY2627+ 490=10 folks than to the SRY2627=12 folks. That makes 490=10 a clade for SRY2627.....

But does a rare occurrence mean it doesn't mutate quickly? I thought SNPs were based off of mutation rates, and not so much on rarity of STRs; especially one STR. Otherwise, DYS448=17 would signify another subclade within SRY2627 because of its rarity. Or am I just interpreting this wrong?

No. A rare occurrence may or may not be old. In this case there are enough SRY2627+ 490=10 people with enough diversity on other STRs that I would predict that the mutation from 490=12 to 490=10 is quite old.

448=17 may represent another subclade. I don't know.

Ken Nordtvedt has long been a proponent of the idea that a subclade is a group related people, whether they have an SNP that marks them or not.

Are there another STR off-modals that combine with 448=17 for a strong STR signature under SRY2627+ 490=10? The more the merrier in terms of improving the probability there is an underlying subclade.

There a few other STR off-modals that I've found mainly with my results. I have noticed there are a few STRs that are the same as L165; very few other SRY2627+ people have the same results. Also, my WTY came up with a private SNP, which might possibly have some connection to these similarities but I'm not 100% sure.

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

Arch

Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, and there are probably several others.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

Arch

Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, and there are probably several others.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

Arch

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

Arch

Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, and there are probably several others.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

Arch

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

I was looking at the Y-DNA draft tree from FTDNA and noticed that none of the Zs are listed. I wonder how long it will be before FTDNA is testing for them and will add them to their tree. It's nice to see more SNPs, but at the same time we will really need more people to test in order to get "hits." Nonetheless, it's nice these finds hopefully will point to geographical affinities, or possible origins, with more accuracy.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

What's the status of Z262 versus L176.2 and L165. Do we have confirmation from FTDNA and/or the 1000 HG project that Z263 is parallel to L165 under L176.2?

I don't know, I just don't get SRY2627 as being that old in Iberia. Perhaps this makes sense if the Pyrenees were settled by a number of people from Southern France.

Anyway, the above is just data. I'll let you decide its value.

I don't think SRY2627 is that old at all. So the problem therein lies about where this "youngish" approx. 3,000 year old subclade originated. Did it spawn off from L176.2 north of the Pyrenees or south of the Pyrenees? Or is there another SNP yet to be found between L176.2 and SRY2627? I doubt the latter. So now it's a matter of finding the oldest SRY2627 (most variant) and connecting to the youngest L176.2 (least variant) person(s).

Arch

Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, and there are probably several others.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

Arch

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

I was looking at the Y-DNA draft tree from FTDNA and noticed that none of the Zs are listed. I wonder how long it will be before FTDNA is testing for them and will add them to their tree. It's nice to see more SNPs, but at the same time we will really need more people to test in order to get "hits." Nonetheless, it's nice these finds hopefully will point to geographical affinities, or possible origins, with more accuracy.

Arch

Z262 is not on the draft tree, but it is available to order. It is the only one of the 14 that are available, though it is apparent FTDNA has done a few tests of the others.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

What's the status of Z262 versus L176.2 and L165. Do we have confirmation from FTDNA and/or the 1000 HG project that Z263 is parallel to L165 under L176.2?

There have been three tests reported in the SRY2627 group, one positive and two negative. All three are in kits that are L176.2+, so that proves Z262 is below L176.2. Kit #171839 is L147.3+/Z262-, and my kit is L147.3-/Z262+, so that proves those two are on the same level. 1000 HG, according to the year-old chart, along with my implied SRY2627-, indicates Z262 is above SRY2627, but L165 is not on that chart, so there is no indication whether L165 is below or parallel to Z262.

Interestingly, Isidro ordered Z262 and Z198 at about the same time I did, actually one batch apart, and our Z262 results came back the same day, but I came back Z198+ and he hasn't got a result yet. That makes me wonder if he's going to come back Z198-, which would be interesting.

If kit #171839 also ordered a Z198 at the same time he ordered Z262, then his didn't come back either.

One DYS490 = 10 SRY2627+ individual has R-L628+ and another DYS490 = 10 individual has R-L659+; L628+ and L659+ are private SNPs. I am SRY2627+ (DYS490 = 10, DYS425 = null, DYS525 = 6) and have not tested any SNPS downstream from SRY2627+.Stephen

I am not sure if this is what you intended, but this information leads me to believe that there is not a universal SNP associated with DYS 490=10.

I recognize that SRY2627+ 4090=10 people are not marked by a unique SNP, at least yet. Hoewever, 4090=10 is such a rare occurrence that I think we could consider this a reliable clade.

Out of about 5000 P312 confirmed people tested for 490, outside of SRY2627, only 3 are 490=10. There aren't that many 490=11's even. 490=12 is modal. I just think the odds are very great that if you are SRY2767+ and 490=10 then you are probably more closely related to all of the other SRY2627+ 490=10 folks than to the SRY2627=12 folks. That makes 490=10 a clade for SRY2627.

Here are the SRY2627 490=10 guys that have Old World MDKA's in our DNA projects. There are a couple from Spain, but there are more from France and Germany.

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

If they are confirmed SRY2627+ and in a public FTDNA project I will add them to the spreadsheet.

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

If they are confirmed SRY2627+ and in a public FTDNA project I will add them to the spreadsheet.

There are approximately three other genetic cousins who are not members of either project. Please note that some members are in both projects and we have several 67/67 matches.

If you need additional information, please let me know.

Stephen

I haven't written the macro conversions to copy data from non FTDNA screens. The formatting is different and sometimes they are behind. Can you get the Parish and Hodges admins to turn on their public FTDNA screens.

Here is how a project admin can do that:

Login to FTDNA's GAP 2.0 tool

go to the Project Administration pull down menuselect Public Website

on SITE CONFIGURATION tab, check mark the following:

Member DNA (YDNA) Results Ancestor's (YDNA) Map Y-DNA SNP Display Options: Member's Last Name and Most Distant Ancestor Public Map Display: Most Distant Known Ancestor Public Map Display: Kit Number

Then make sure to click on Save Settings. The key checkboxes for thisreport are "Member DNA (YDNA) Results" and "Y-DNA SNP".

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

If they are confirmed SRY2627+ and in a public FTDNA project I will add them to the spreadsheet.

There are approximately three other genetic cousins who are not members of either project. Please note that some members are in both projects and we have several 67/67 matches.

If you need additional information, please let me know.

Stephen

I haven't written the macro conversions to copy data from non FTDNA screens. The formatting is different and sometimes they are behind. Can you get the Parish and Hodges admins to turn on their public FTDNA screens.

Here is how a project admin can do that:

Login to FTDNA's GAP 2.0 tool

go to the Project Administration pull down menuselect Public Website

on SITE CONFIGURATION tab, check mark the following:

Member DNA (YDNA) Results Ancestor's (YDNA) Map Y-DNA SNP Display Options: Member's Last Name and Most Distant Ancestor Public Map Display: Most Distant Known Ancestor Public Map Display: Kit Number

Then make sure to click on Save Settings. The key checkboxes for thisreport are "Member DNA (YDNA) Results" and "Y-DNA SNP".

Mike -

Since I administer the Parrish/Parish project, I will try to turn on the public Y-DNA screen when time permits. I will also contact one of the administrators of the Hodges project.

My SRY2627+ genetic cousins of whom I am aware (about 30 more than the approximately half dozen that I see in your list), most of whom are in two DNA projects, one of which I administer, could be added to your list.

If they are confirmed SRY2627+ and in a public FTDNA project I will add them to the spreadsheet.

There are approximately three other genetic cousins who are not members of either project. Please note that some members are in both projects and we have several 67/67 matches.

If you need additional information, please let me know.

Stephen

I haven't written the macro conversions to copy data from non FTDNA screens. The formatting is different and sometimes they are behind. Can you get the Parish and Hodges admins to turn on their public FTDNA screens.

Here is how a project admin can do that:

Login to FTDNA's GAP 2.0 tool

go to the Project Administration pull down menuselect Public Website

on SITE CONFIGURATION tab, check mark the following:

Member DNA (YDNA) Results Ancestor's (YDNA) Map Y-DNA SNP Display Options: Member's Last Name and Most Distant Ancestor Public Map Display: Most Distant Known Ancestor Public Map Display: Kit Number

Then make sure to click on Save Settings. The key checkboxes for thisreport are "Member DNA (YDNA) Results" and "Y-DNA SNP".

Mike -

Since I administer the Parrish/Parish project, I will try to turn on the public Y-DNA screen when time permits. I will also contact one of the administrators of the Hodges project.

I was browsing through some journals and came across one published in 1992 and it mentions how the Aranese are more Celtic than Basque. I thought this was quite interesting and seems to support other older papers that the Basque population is quite young. I'm still not sure how later research reflects a much different story as Basques being Upper Paleolithic, then Mesolithic, and one paper explains a few years ago explained M-153 as Neolithic.

I find it intriguing the word Aran allegedly is derived from the Basque word 'Haran' meaning valley, but I notice what seems to me more Celtic and possibly Germanic toponyms in the valley than Basque. I also find little Basque influence besides one or two restaurants that specialize in Basque cuisine.

This work describes the results of a survey on the Rhesus system carried out in the autochthonous population of Aran Valley, a small and rather isolated region on the Northern side of the Central Pyrenees. Also, a comparison is made with other geographically and historically related populations in order to discuss the data in terms of the historical origin of this population. The data obtained shows a good agreement between observed and expected values in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The Aranese population also reveals some peculiarities concerning some haplotypes. The comparison with European and non European Mediterranean populations shows a clear genetic distance from Basque populations, and a relative proximity with presumably Celtic ones.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

What's the status of Z262 versus L176.2 and L165. Do we have confirmation from FTDNA and/or the 1000 HG project that Z263 is parallel to L165 under L176.2?

There have been three tests reported in the SRY2627 group, one positive and two negative. All three are in kits that are L176.2+, so that proves Z262 is below L176.2. Kit #171839 is L147.3+/Z262-, and my kit is L147.3-/Z262+, so that proves those two are on the same level. 1000 HG, according to the year-old chart, along with my implied SRY2627-, indicates Z262 is above SRY2627, but L165 is not on that chart, so there is no indication whether L165 is below or parallel to Z262.

Interestingly, Isidro ordered Z262 and Z198 at about the same time I did, actually one batch apart, and our Z262 results came back the same day, but I came back Z198+ and he hasn't got a result yet. That makes me wonder if he's going to come back Z198-, which would be interesting.

If kit #171839 also ordered a Z198 at the same time he ordered Z262, then his didn't come back either.

Two new Z262 tests have come in. One kit is SRY2627+/Z262+, which along with my Z262+/presumed SRY2627- and the 1000 HG results, proves more conclusively that Z262 is above SRY2627.

Another kit is L165+/Z262-, so with the kit that is L165-/Z262+/SRY2627+ it proves that L165 and Z262 are on the same level below L176.2.

Still conspicuously absent as I write this are any new results for Z198.

Hmmm, interesting. Z199, Z200, Z201, Z202, Z203, Z204, Z205, Z262, Z263, Z264, Z265, Z266, Z267, Z269. So given that Z262 is between L176.2 and SRY2627, we can further presume so are the others that are listed here?

I think the odds are that, out of the 14 you listed, 7 are above SRY2627 and 7 are below. But my Z262+ and presumed SRY2627- proves at least Z262 is above SRY2627.

What's the status of Z262 versus L176.2 and L165. Do we have confirmation from FTDNA and/or the 1000 HG project that Z263 is parallel to L165 under L176.2?

There have been three tests reported in the SRY2627 group, one positive and two negative. All three are in kits that are L176.2+, so that proves Z262 is below L176.2. Kit #171839 is L147.3+/Z262-, and my kit is L147.3-/Z262+, so that proves those two are on the same level. 1000 HG, according to the year-old chart, along with my implied SRY2627-, indicates Z262 is above SRY2627, but L165 is not on that chart, so there is no indication whether L165 is below or parallel to Z262.

Interestingly, Isidro ordered Z262 and Z198 at about the same time I did, actually one batch apart, and our Z262 results came back the same day, but I came back Z198+ and he hasn't got a result yet. That makes me wonder if he's going to come back Z198-, which would be interesting.

If kit #171839 also ordered a Z198 at the same time he ordered Z262, then his didn't come back either.

Two new Z262 tests have come in. One kit is SRY2627+/Z262+, which along with my Z262+/presumed SRY2627- and the 1000 HG results, proves more conclusively that Z262 is above SRY2627.

Another kit is L165+/Z262-, so with the kit that is L165-/Z262+/SRY2627+ it proves that L165 and Z262 are on the same level below L176.2.

Still conspicuously absent as I write this are any new results for Z198.

I am kit 86995. I was the WTY participant in which L176.2 was first discovered in a R-P312* individual (Didier found it). I am SRY2627- and L165-. I have not been active in this community for a couple of years. Checking in now, I see that there may be a few additional SNPs below L176.2. Last week orders were placed for:

Z262Z198Z225L628DF17

I'll post results when the come in. If there are any other SNPs I should consider testing for please let me know.

I am kit 86995. I was the WTY participant in which L176.2 was first discovered in a R-P312* individual (Didier found it). I am SRY2627- and L165-. I have not been active in this community for a couple of years. Checking in now, I see that there may be a few additional SNPs below L176.2. Last week orders were placed for:

Z262Z198Z225L628DF17

I'll post results when the come in. If there are any other SNPs I should consider testing for please let me know.

That's good news! Also, we certainly could use more people with P312* to test.

When I GDs comparisons with the whole SRY2627+ DYS=490 Group A0, I noticed that a large percentage of us have approx. 16 GD to Alberti Donato who's ancestry is around the Asiago region (great cheese by the way). Only 33% of the 15 SRY2627 in this group who tested at 67 or greater STRs do not have a GD of 16 or less. Ankele shows a GD of 9 with Alberti, apparently makes sense they are in relative proximity to each other. I'm wondering if my branch of SRY2627 orginates from around Northern Italy.